Posted on 03/12/2019 4:15:07 PM PDT by jazusamo
More than a dozen Republican senators introduced legislation on Tuesday that would make it easier for Congress to terminate future national emergency declarations, days before the chamber will vote on President Trump's.
The legislation, spearheaded by Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah), would require that Congress pass a resolution extending an emergency declaration after 30 days for it to continue, otherwise it would be terminated.
“If Congress is troubled by recent emergency declarations made pursuant to the National Emergencies Act, they only have themselves to blame. Congress gave these legislative powers away in 1976 and it is far past time that we as an institution took them back. If we don’t want our president acting like a king we need to start taking back the legislative powers that allow him to do so," Lee said in a statement. In addition to Lee, GOP Sens. Chuck Grassley (Iowa), Thom Tillis (N.C.), Joni Ernst (Iowa), Pat Toomey (Pa.), Ron Johnson (Wis.), Jerry Moran (Kansas), Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.), Ben Sasse (Neb.), Roy Blunt (Mo.), Rob Portman (Ohio), Todd Young (Ind.), Mitt Romney (Utah), Ted Cruz (Texas) and Roger Wicker (Miss.) are supporting the legislation.
The legislation—known as the Assuring that Robust, Thorough, and Informed Congressional Leadership is Exercised Over National Emergencies, or ARTICLE ONE, Act—would be a significant change to the mechanism Congress has to block a national emergency declaration.
Currently, Congress has to pass a resolution of disapproval to block Trump's emergency declaration on constructing the U.S.-Mexico border wall. Trump is expected to veto the resolution and neither chambers are expected to be able to override that veto.
Trump's emergency declaration has sparked a widespread discussion among Senate Republicans about if they should change the National Emergencies Act. Though Republicans largely support Trump on border security they are concerned that a future Democratic president will use his precedent to force through issues like climate change or gun control.
Lee's legislation would not impact Trump's current emergency declaration on the wall but, if passed, would impact any future emergency declarations.
Senators are discussing changes to the emergency powers law with the White House but it's unclear if Trump would support reining in his own executive authority, and he's consistently bristled at attempts by Congress to force his hand on legislation.
Blunt, a member of GOP leadership, said that Trump had raised concerns about executive overreach by previous presidents and that supporting Lee's legislation would give him a chance to get back in line with his campaign rhetoric.
"Well the president had problems with a candidate with the Obama overreach, so he's been on record for some time on this topic," he said. "I think this will give him a chance to get back to where he was three years ago."
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told reporters on Tuesday that Republican senators were looking at amending the law.
"We're looking at some ways to revisit the law. There's a lot of discomfort with the law. …Was it too broad back in the 70s when it was passed? So yeah, we're discussing altering that," McConnell told reporters during a weekly press conference.
Asked if he would support Lee's legislation, McConnell added that he "may well."
How fascinating.
I don’t recall any of them doing this to Obama.
They even left it to Texas to sue Obama over the DACA fraud.
All of a sudden they’re incensed about Presidential overreach?
They spent 8 years tolerating it.
Right on!
“Was it too broad back in the 70s when it was passed?”
_____________________________________________________
So of all the National Emergencies you senatorial morons picked this one to take up this question? Please tell us Senator...which big-business donors of yours are concerned?
The bunch of SOB’s!
VETO! Got the pen and a phone. Also, House will stand by Trump. We weeded out a lot of RINOs and the minority dudes are “dug in” ala resistance and ready for the long slog!
None of obungholes eos were aimed at securing the border and stopping the flow of illegals into the country.
In this case there is an actual national emergency and there is a contitutional requirement to protect the border from invasion. We are being invaded by illegals who sh1t on our national laws.
Mr. Rogers:
“Can you say ‘VETO?’”
“I knew that you could.”
I have a different take on this. The dems are bitching about the President exercising his emergency powers. Yet, they said not a peep when Obama declared an emergency left and right. So let them now get rid of this. Betcha they will find a way not to support it. Why? Because more than anything else they support “pen and phone” statist power. They want this when their guy gets back in power.
Tells me everything I need to know.
Let’s wrap this baby up TODAY, Folks! Only $588 to go!!
Note that this is The Hill. Pres. Trump may not be the actual target of this bill. After reading it, the President might approve.
Don’t trust the HateTrump media on what this bill actually does.
And WE THE PEOPLE are Taking Names of all these quisling politicians.
for defense emergencies, President doesn’t need congressional approval
and any such law “requiring” same is unconstitutional, a president can simply ignore it (and the senators can go suck pickles)
And Thom Tillis seems to act like a lib at every opportunity; I'm surprised he's not out toppling Confederate monuments too. How that snake ever slipped past the people of NC is baffling.
I’m hoping that this is actually some judo, too.
Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
If we can drastically limit the emergency powers of the POTUS and build the wall anyway, it’s a win.
This is how the AIDS virus works. Invade the nucleus and shut down the shields.
It’s all about illegals and yes, drug money.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
